Proxalutamide Reduces the Rate of Hospitalization for COVID-19 Male Outpatients: A Randomized Double-Blinded Placebo-Controlled Trial

Antiandrogens as Therapies for COVID-19: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

In 2019, the breakthrough of the coronavirus 2 disease (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), represented one of the major issues of our recent history. Different drugs have been tested to rapidly find effective anti-viral treatments and, among these, antiandrogens have been suggested to play a role in mediating SARS-CoV-2 infection. Considering the high heterogeneity of studies on this topic, we decided to review the current literature.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. A search strategy was conducted on PUBMED and Medline. Only original articles published from March 2020 to 31 August 2023 investigating the possible protective role of antiandrogens were included. In vitro or preclinical studies and reports not in the English language were excluded. The main objective was to investigate how antiandrogens may interfere with COVID-19 outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 1755 records, we selected 31 studies, the majority of which consisted of retrospective clinical data collections and of randomized clinical trials during the first and second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, we can state that antiandrogens do not seem to protect individuals from SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity and, thus, their use should not be encouraged in this field.

Proxalutamide reduces SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated inflammatory response

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, data suggested that males had a higher risk of developing severe disease and that androgen deprivation therapy might be associated with protection. Combined with the fact that TMPRSS2 (transmembrane serine protease 2), a host entry factor for the SARS-CoV-2 virus, was a well-known androgen-regulated gene, this led to an upsurge of research investigating androgen receptor (AR)-targeting drugs. Proxalutamide, an AR antagonist, was shown in initial clinical studies to benefit COVID-19 patients; however, further validation is needed as one study was retracted. Due to continued interest in proxalutamide, which is in phase 3 trials, we examined its ability to impact SARS-CoV-2 infection and downstream inflammatory responses. Proxalutamide exerted similar effects as enzalutamide, an AR antagonist prescribed for advanced prostate cancer, in decreasing AR signaling and expression of TMPRSS2 and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), the SARS-CoV-2 receptor. However, proxalutamide led to degradation of AR protein, which was not observed with enzalutamide. Proxalutamide inhibited SARS-CoV-2 infection with an IC50 value of 97 nM, compared to 281 nM for enzalutamide. Importantly, proxalutamide inhibited infection by multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants and synergized with remdesivir. Proxalutamide protected against cell death in response to tumor necrosis factor alpha and interferon gamma, and overall survival of mice was increased with proxalutamide treatment prior to cytokine exposure. Mechanistically, we found that proxalutamide increased levels of NRF2, an essential transcription factor that mediates antioxidant responses, and decreased lung inflammation. These data provide compelling evidence that proxalutamide can prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and cytokine-induced lung damage, suggesting that promising clinical data may emerge from ongoing phase 3 trials.

The Problem with Capitalism in the Trichological Sciences

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels exposed a pattern of societal conduct they chose to name capitalistic bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie created a common language of communication through collaboration, gathered in circles such as free academies, scientific academies, literary circles, and the media, that provided forums for the emerging bourgeoisie to conceive of new social orders. One aspect of bourgeoisie culture is conspicuous consumption, central to which, is a culture of prestige through material consumption. Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership and the operation for profit. Characteristic features of capitalism include competitive market, commercialism, property rights recognition, capital accumulation, material consumption, culture of prestige, sycophancy, and coterie. Critiques of capitalism allege that it is exploitative, alienating, unstable, unsustainable, and inefficient. In turn, critical theory inspired philosophers such as Michel Foucault to conceptualize how we form identities through social interaction. When the patient's body entered the field of medicine, it also entered the field of power where the patient can be manipulated by professional authority. Without forcibly being a proponent of political theory, as an academic, one is inevitably confronted with Marxism in terms of philosophy. As a discipline at the interface of medicine, lifestyle, and cosmetics, trichology is particularly susceptible to the primary aims of profit, consumption, and prestige that characterize the capitalistic bourgeoisie. The trichological sciences, particularly trichoscopy, have discovered a profitable market for itself. The practice of trichology is not immune to malpractice. It has created an industry that dwells on the autistic thinking of patients and doctors, and because it is prosperous, makes propaganda among lay people and doctors that necessarily leads to abuses.

Sex hormones in SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility: key players or confounders?

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has a clear sex disparity in clinical outcomes. Hence, the interaction between sex hormones, virus entry receptors and immune responses has attracted major interest as a target for the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infections. This Review summarizes the current understanding of the roles of androgens, oestrogens and progesterone in the regulation of virus entry receptors and disease progression of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as well as their therapeutic value. Although many experimental and clinical studies have analysed potential mechanisms by which female sex hormones might provide protection against SARS-CoV-2 infectivity, there is currently no clear evidence for a sex-specific expression of virus entry receptors. In addition, reports describing an influence of oestrogen, progesterone and androgens on the course of COVID-19 vary widely. Current data also do not support the administration of oestradiol in COVID-19. The conflicting evidence and lack of consensus results from a paucity of mechanistic studies and clinical trials reporting sex-disaggregated data. Further, the influence of variables beyond biological factors (sex), such as sociocultural factors (gender), on COVID-19 manifestations has not been investigated. Future research will have to fill this knowledge gap as the influence of sex and gender on COVID-19 will be essential to understanding and managing the long-term consequences of this pandemic.

Review of therapeutic mechanisms and applications based on SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies

COVID-19 pandemic is a global public health emergency. Despite extensive research, there are still few effective treatment options available today. Neutralizing-antibody-based treatments offer a broad range of applications, including the prevention and treatment of acute infectious diseases. Hundreds of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody studies are currently underway around the world, with some already in clinical applications. The development of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody opens up a new therapeutic option for COVID-19. We intend to review our current knowledge about antibodies targeting various regions (i.e., RBD regions, non-RBD regions, host cell targets, and cross-neutralizing antibodies), as well as the current scientific evidence for neutralizing-antibody-based treatments based on convalescent plasma therapy, intravenous immunoglobulin, monoclonal antibodies, and recombinant drugs. The functional evaluation of antibodies (i.e., in vitro or in vivo assays) is also discussed. Finally, some current issues in the field of neutralizing-antibody-based therapies are highlighted.

Retraction of Clinical Trials about the SARS-CoV-2 Infection: An Unaddressed Problem and Its Possible Impact on Coronavirus Disease (COVID)-19 Treatment

We are presenting an overview of the retracted clinical trials about the Coronavirus Disease (COVID)-19 published in PubMed using the descriptors ((COVID-19 OR SARS-CoV-2) AND (Clinical Trial)). We collected the information for i) the first author's country; ii) the journal name where the study was published; iii) the impact factor of the journal; iv) the main objective of the study; v) methods including population, intervention, study design, and outcomes; and vi) results and conclusions. We collected complete information from the retraction notes published by the journals and the number of publications/retractions related to non-COVID-19 clinical trials published simultaneously. We also included the Altmetric index for the clinical trials and the retraction notes about COVID-19 to compare the accessibility to both studies' indexes. The retraction of clinical trials occurred in four countries (one in Lebanon, one in India, one in Brazil, and five in Egypt) and six journals (one in Viruses, one in Archives of Virology, one in Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy, one in Frontiers in Medicine, two in Scientific Reports, and two in The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene). Eight drugs were tested (Ivermectin, Vitamin D, Proxalutamide, Hydroxychloroquine, Remdesevir, Favipiravir, and Sofosbuvir + Daclatasvir) in the studies. One of the retractions was suggested by the authors due to an error in the statistical analysis, which compromised their results and conclusions. Also, the methods, mainly the allocation, were not well conducted in the two studies, and the studies were retracted. In addition, the studies performed by Dabbous et al. presented several issues, mainly including several raw datasets that did not prove their findings. Moreover, two studies were retracted due to data overlap and copying. Significant concerns were raised about the integrity of the data and reported results in another article. We identified a higher Altmetric index for the original studies, proving that the retracted studies were accessed more than the retraction notes. Interestingly, the impact of the original articles is much higher than their retraction notes. The different Altmetric indexes show that possibly people who read those retracted articles are not reading their retraction notes and are unaware of the erroneous information they share. COVID-19- related clinical trials were ~two-time times more retracted than the other clinical trials performed during the same time.

Small molecules in the treatment of COVID-19

The outbreak of COVID-19 has become a global crisis, and brought severe disruptions to societies and economies. Until now, effective therapeutics against COVID-19 are in high demand. Along with our improved understanding of the structure, function, and pathogenic process of SARS-CoV-2, many small molecules with potential anti-COVID-19 effects have been developed. So far, several antiviral strategies were explored. Besides directly inhibition of viral proteins such as RdRp and Mpro, interference of host enzymes including ACE2 and proteases, and blocking relevant immunoregulatory pathways represented by JAK/STAT, BTK, NF-κB, and NLRP3 pathways, are regarded feasible in drug development. The development of small molecules to treat COVID-19 has been achieved by several strategies, including computer-aided lead compound design and screening, natural product discovery, drug repurposing, and combination therapy. Several small molecules representative by remdesivir and paxlovid have been proved or authorized emergency use in many countries. And many candidates have entered clinical-trial stage. Nevertheless, due to the epidemiological features and variability issues of SARS-CoV-2, it is necessary to continue exploring novel strategies against COVID-19. This review discusses the current findings in the development of small molecules for COVID-19 treatment. Moreover, their detailed mechanism of action, chemical structures, and preclinical and clinical efficacies are discussed.

Testosterone suppression combined with high dose estrogen as potential treatment of SARS-CoV-2. A mini review

Compared to females, males experience severe acute respiratory syndrome due to COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) more often, and also die more frequently from COVID-19. Testosterone has inhibitory and estrogens have favorable effects on the immune system. Both ACE2 and TMPRSS2 are specific host-cellular proteins stimulating viral entry in cells and SARS-CoV-2. Both proteins can be suppressed by inhibition of testosterone levels and by stimulation of estrogen levels. Therefore, both androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and estrogen therapy (ET) may decrease COVID-19 virus cell entry. Literature was searched for evidence of COVID-19 treatment benefits with estrogens, progesterone, androgen deprivation, and anti-androgens. Data supporting the effect of ADT on SARS-CoV-2 are sparse and inconsistent. The benefit of anti-androgen therapy is inconsistent. Data on the effect of ET were not found. Indirect estrogen data related to menopausal hormone therapy and hormonal contraception are favorable. In a small study, progesterone had some beneficial effects. The combination of ADT and ET (ADET) has never been studied as a treatment option for SARS-CoV-2. Based on the mode of action of the combination, it is hypothesized that ADET may be an effective and safe treatment of SARS-CoV-2, to be confirmed in a clinical trial.

Research and development of Chinese anti-COVID-19 drugs

The outbreak and spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) highlighted the importance and urgency of the research and development of therapeutic drugs. Very early into the COVID-19 pandemic, China has begun developing drugs, with some notable progress. Herein, we summarizes the anti-COVID-19 drugs and promising drug candidates originally developed and researched in China. Furthermore, we discussed the developmental prospects, mechanisms of action, and advantages and disadvantages of the anti-COVID-19 drugs in development, with the aim to contribute to the rational use of drugs in COVID-19 treatment and more effective development of new drugs against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the variants. Neutralizing antibody is an effective approach to overcome COVID-19. However, drug resistance induced by rapid virus mutation will likely to challenge neutralizing antibodies. Taking into account current epidemic trends, small molecule drugs have a crucial role in fighting COVID-19 due to their significant advantage of convenient administration and affordable and broad-spectrum. Traditional Chinese medicines, including natural products and traditional Chinese medicine prescriptions, contribute to the treatment of COVID-19 due to their unique mechanism of action. Currently, the research and development of Chinese anti-COVID-19 drugs have led to some promising achievements, thus prompting us to expect even more rapidly available solutions.

Androgens' Role in Severity and Mortality Rates of COVID-19

By the end of December 2019 new corona virus began to spread from Wuhan, China and caused a worldwide pandemic. COVID-19 deaths and prevalence represented sex discrepant patterns with higher rate of deaths and infection in males than females which could be justified by androgen-mediated mechanisms. This review aimed to assess the role of androgens in COVID-19 severity and mortality. Androgens increase expressions of Type II transmembrane Serine Protease (TMPRSS2) and Angiotensin Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2), which both facilitate new corona virus entry into host cell and their expression is higher in young males than females. According to observational studies, prevalence of COVID-19 infections and deaths was more in androgenic alopecic patients than patients without androgenic alopecia. The COVID-19 mortality rates in aged men (>60 years) were substantially higher than aged females and even young males caused by high inflammatory activities such as cytokine storm due to hypogonadism in this population. Use of anti-androgen and TMPRSS2 inhibitor drugs considerably modified COVID-19 symptoms. Androgen deprivation therapy also improved COVID-19 symptoms in prostate cancer: overall the role of androgens in severity of COVID-19 and its associated mortality seemed to be very important. So, more studies in variety of populations are required to define the absolute role of androgens.

Impact of gender-affirming hormone therapy on the development of COVID-19 infections and associated complications: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can produce a wide range of clinical manifestations from asymptomatic to life-threatening. Various researchers have worked to elucidate the pathogenic mechanisms underlying these variable presentations. Differences in individual responses to systemic inflammation and coagulopathy appear to be modulated by several factors, including sex steroid hormones. Transgender men or non-binary individuals who undergo gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) are a unique population of interest for exploring the androgen-mediated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hypothesis. As the search for reliable and effective COVID-19 treatments continues, understanding the risks and benefits of GAHT may mitigate COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality in this patient population.

AIM

To investigate the potential role of GAHT in the development of COVID-19 infections and complications.

METHODS

This systematic review implemented an algorithmic approach using PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar top 100 results, and archives of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery was on January 12, 2022 using the key words "gender" AND "hormone" AND "therapy" AND "COVID-19" as well as associated terms. Non-English articles, articles published prior to 2019 (prior to COVID-19), and manuscripts in the form of reviews, commentaries, or letters were excluded. References of the selected publications were screened as well.

RESULTS

The database search resulted in the final inclusion of 14 studies related to GAHT COVID-19. Of the included studies, only two studies directly involved and reported on COVID-19 in transgender patients. Several clinical trials looked at the relationship between testosterone, estrogen, and progesterone in COVID-19 infected cis-gender men and women. It has been proposed that androgens may facilitate initial COVID-19 infection, however, once this occurs, testosterone may have a protective effect. Multiple clinical studies have shown that low baseline testosterone levels in men with COVID-19 are associated with worsening outcomes. The role of female sex hormones, including estrogen and progesterone have also been proposed as potential protective factors in COVID-19 infection. This was exemplified in multiple studies investigating different outcomes in pre- and post-menopausal women as well as those taking hormone replacement therapy. Two studies related specifically to transgender patients and GAHT found that estrogen and progesterone could help protect men against COVID-19, and that testosterone hormone therapy may increase the risk of contracting COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Few studies were found related to the role of GAHT in COVID-19 infections. Additional research is necessary to enhance our understanding of this relationship and provide better care for transgender patients.

The precision medicine process for treating rare disease using the artificial intelligence tool mediKanren

There are over 6,000 different rare diseases estimated to impact 300 million people worldwide. As genetic testing becomes more common practice in the clinical setting, the number of rare disease diagnoses will continue to increase, resulting in the need for novel treatment options. Identifying treatments for these disorders is challenging due to a limited understanding of disease mechanisms, small cohort sizes, interindividual symptom variability, and little commercial incentive to develop new treatments. A promising avenue for treatment is drug repurposing, where FDA-approved drugs are repositioned as novel treatments. However, linking disease mechanisms to drug action can be extraordinarily difficult and requires a depth of knowledge across multiple fields, which is complicated by the rapid pace of biomedical knowledge discovery. To address these challenges, The Hugh Kaul Precision Medicine Institute developed an artificial intelligence tool, mediKanren, that leverages the mechanistic insight of genetic disorders to identify therapeutic options. Using knowledge graphs, mediKanren enables an efficient way to link all relevant literature and databases. This tool has allowed for a scalable process that has been used to help over 500 rare disease families. Here, we provide a description of our process, the advantages of mediKanren, and its impact on rare disease patients.

Recent advances in small-molecular therapeutics for COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a fundamental challenge to global health. Since the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, great efforts have been made to identify antiviral strategies and develop therapeutic drugs to combat the disease. There are different strategies for developing small molecular anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs, including targeting coronavirus structural proteins (e.g. spike protein), non-structural proteins (nsp) (e.g. RdRp, M^pro, PL^pro, helicase, nsp14, and nsp16), host proteases (e.g. TMPRSS2, cathepsin, and furin) and the pivotal proteins mediating endocytosis (e.g. PIKfyve), as well as developing endosome acidification agents and immune response modulators. Favipiravir and chloroquine are the anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents that were identified earlier in this epidemic and repurposed for COVID-19 clinical therapy based on these strategies. However, their efficacies are controversial. Currently, three small molecular anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents, remdesivir, molnupiravir, and Paxlovid (PF-07321332 plus ritonavir), have been granted emergency use authorization or approved for COVID-19 therapy in many countries due to their significant curative effects in phase III trials. Meanwhile, a large number of promising anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug candidates have entered clinical evaluation. The development of these drugs brings hope for us to finally conquer COVID-19. In this account, we conducted a comprehensive review of the recent advances in small molecule anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents according to the target classification. Here we present all the approved drugs and most of the important drug candidates for each target, and discuss the challenges and perspectives for the future research and development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in androgen sensitive phenotypes – A study on associated factors for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and its adverse effects among androgenetic alopecia and benign prostate hyperplasia patients

Background

Androgen sensitivity, which was established as the leading etiology of androgenetic alopecia (AGA) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), plays an important role in SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination is essential for AGA and BPH patients in view of the high risk from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Purpose

We aimed to investigate the associated factors for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and its side effects in populations with AGA and BPH.

Method

We collected the data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and adverse reactions of male AGA and BPH patients visited the outpatient of Xiangya hospital by telephone and web-based questionnaires. Vaccination rate and adverse reactions were compared by different vaccine types and use of anti-androgen therapy.

Result

A total of 457 AGA patients and 397 BPH patients were recruited in this study. Among which, 92.8% AGA patients and 61.0% BPH patients had at least the first dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (p < 0.001). Having comorbidities and use of anti-androgen therapy increased the risk of un-vaccination among AGA by 2.875 and 3.729 times, respectively (p < 0.001). Around 31.1% AGA patients and 9.5% BPH patients presented adverse reactions, which were mostly mild. Anti-androgen therapy increased the inclination of injection site pain after vaccination (18.7% vs 11.9%; OR: 1.708, 95% CI: 1.088-2.683, p = 0.019).

Conclusion

Co-existence of other systemic diseases and anti-androgen therapy were the limiting factors for SARS-CoV-2 unvaccination, especially in AGA patients. The importance of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines should be strengthened and popularized in androgen sensitive phenotypes.

Stem Cell-Based Models for Studying the Effects of Cancer and Cancer Therapies on the Peripheral Nervous System

In recent years, the complexity of cancer and cancer therapies and their interactions with the peripheral nervous system have come into focus, but limitations in experimental models have remained a significant challenge in the field. As evidence, there are currently no therapies approved that target cancer-peripheral nervous system or cancer therapy-peripheral nervous system interactions as an anti-neoplastic or anti-neurotoxic agent, respectively. Human pluripotent stem cells offer an appealing model system that, unlike rodent models, is compatible with high throughput, high content applications; techniques that reflect modern drug discovery methodologies. Thus, utilizing the key advantages of stem cell-based models in tandem with the strengths of traditional animal models offers a complementary and interdisciplinary strategy to advance cancer and cancer therapy-peripheral nervous system research and drug discovery. In this review, the current status of the cancer-peripheral nervous system and cancer therapy-peripheral nervous system research is discussed, examples where stem cell-based models have been implemented are described, and avenues where stem cell-based models may further advance the field are proposed.

Need for a Standardized Translational Drug Development Platform: Lessons Learned from the Repurposing of Drugs for COVID-19

In the absence of drugs to treat or prevent COVID-19, drug repurposing can be a valuable strategy. Despite a substantial number of clinical trials, drug repurposing did not deliver on its promise. While success was observed with some repurposed drugs (e.g., remdesivir, dexamethasone, tocilizumab, baricitinib), others failed to show clinical efficacy. One reason is the lack of clear translational processes based on adequate preclinical profiling before clinical evaluation. Combined with limitations of existing in vitro and in vivo models, there is a need for a systematic approach to urgent antiviral drug development in the context of a global pandemic. We implemented a methodology to test repurposed and experimental drugs to generate robust preclinical evidence for further clinical development. This translational drug development platform comprises in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo models of SARS-CoV-2, along with pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation approaches to evaluate exposure levels in plasma and target organs. Here, we provide examples of identified repurposed antiviral drugs tested within our multidisciplinary collaboration to highlight lessons learned in urgent antiviral drug development during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our data confirm the importance of assessing in vitro and in vivo potency in multiple assays to boost the translatability of pre-clinical data. The value of pharmacokinetic modeling and simulations for compound prioritization is also discussed. We advocate the need for a standardized translational drug development platform for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 to generate preclinical evidence in support of clinical trials. We propose clear prerequisites for progression of drug candidates for repurposing into clinical trials. Further research is needed to gain a deeper understanding of the scope and limitations of the presented translational drug development platform.

The immune response to COVID-19: Does sex matter?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created unprecedented challenges worldwide. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes COVID-19 and has a complex interaction with the immune system, including growing evidence of sex-specific differences in the immune response. Sex-disaggregated analyses of epidemiological data indicate that males experience more severe symptoms and suffer higher mortality from COVID-19 than females. Many behavioural risk factors and biological factors may contribute to the different immune response. This review examines the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection in the context of sex, with emphasis on potential biological mechanisms explaining differences in clinical outcomes. Understanding sex differences in the pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection will help promote the development of specific strategies to manage the disease.

Higher premorbid serum testosterone predicts COVID-19-related mortality risk in men

Objective

Men are at greater risk from COVID-19 than women. Older, overweight men, and those with type 2 diabetes, have lower testosterone concentrations and poorer COVID-19-related outcomes. We analysed the associations of premorbid serum testosterone concentrations, not confounded by the effects of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, with COVID-19-related mortality risk in men.

Design

This study is a United Kingdom Biobank prospective cohort study of community-dwelling men aged 40-69 years.

Methods

Serum total testosterone and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) were measured at baseline (2006-2010). Free testosterone values were calculated (cFT). the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections and deaths related to COVID-19 were ascertained from 16 March 2020 to 31 January 2021 and modelled using time-stratified Cox regression.

Results

In 159 964 men, there were 5558 SARS-CoV-2 infections and 438 COVID-19 deaths. Younger age, higher BMI, non-White ethnicity, lower educational attainment, and socioeconomic deprivation were associated with incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections but total testosterone, SHBG, and cFT were not. Adjusting for potential confounders, higher total testosterone was associated with COVID-19-related mortality risk (overall trend P = 0.008; hazard ratios (95% CIs) quintile 1, Q1 vs Q5 (reference), 0.84 (0.65-1.12) Q2:Q5, 0.82 (0.63-1.10); Q3:Q5, 0.80 (0.66-1.00); Q4:Q5, 0.82 (0.75-0.93)). Higher SHBG was also associated with COVID-19 mortality risk (P = 0.008), but cFT was not (P = 0.248).

Conclusions

Middle-aged to older men with the highest premorbid serum total testosterone and SHBG concentrations are at greater risk of COVID-19-related mortality. Men could be advised that having relatively high serum testosterone concentrations does not protect against future COVID-19-related mortality. Further investigation of causality and potential underlying mechanisms is warranted.

Effect of Androgen Suppression on Clinical Outcomes in Hospitalized Men With COVID-19: The HITCH Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

SARS-CoV-2 entry requires the TMPRSS2 cell surface protease. Antiandrogen therapies reduce expression of TMPRSS2.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if temporary androgen suppression induced by degarelix improves clinical outcomes of inpatients hospitalized with COVID-19.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The Hormonal Intervention for the Treatment in Veterans With COVID-19 Requiring Hospitalization (HITCH) phase 2, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized clinical trial compared efficacy of degarelix plus standard care vs placebo plus standard care on clinical outcomes in men hospitalized with COVID-19 but not requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. Inpatients were enrolled at 14 Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals from July 22, 2020, to April 8, 2021. Data were analyzed from August 9 to October 15, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients stratified by age, history of hypertension, and disease severity were centrally randomized 2:1 to degarelix, (1-time subcutaneous dose of 240 mg) or a saline placebo. Standard care included but was not limited to supplemental oxygen, antibiotics, vasopressor support, peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis, intravenous fluids, remdesivir, convalescent plasma, and dexamethasone.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The composite primary end point was mortality, ongoing need for hospitalization, or requirement for mechanical ventilation at day 15 after randomization. Secondary end points were time to clinical improvement, inpatient mortality, length of hospitalization, duration of mechanical ventilation, time to achieve a temperature within reference range, maximum severity of COVID-19, and the composite end point at 30 days.

RESULTS

The trial was stopped for futility after the planned interim analysis, at which time there were 96 evaluable patients, including 62 patients randomized to the degarelix group and 34 patients in the placebo group, out of 198 initially planned. The median (range) age was 70.5 (48-85) years. Common comorbidities included chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (15 patients [15.6%]), hypertension (75 patients [78.1%]), cardiovascular disease (27 patients [28.1%]), asthma (12 patients [12.5%]), diabetes (49 patients [51.0%]), and chronic respiratory failure requiring supplemental oxygen at baseline prior to COVID-19 (9 patients [9.4%]). For the primary end point, there was no significant difference between the degarelix and placebo groups (19 patients [30.6%] vs 9 patients [26.5%]; P = .67). Similarly, no differences were observed between degarelix and placebo groups in any secondary end points, including inpatient mortality (11 patients [17.7%] vs 6 patients [17.6%]) or all-cause mortality (11 patients [17.7%] vs 7 patents [20.6%]). There were no differences between degarelix and placebo groups in the overall rates of adverse events (13 patients [21.0%] vs 8 patients [23.5%) and serious adverse events (19 patients [30.6%] vs 13 patients [32.4%]), nor unexpected safety concerns.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial of androgen suppression vs placebo and usual care for men hospitalized with COVID-19, degarelix did not result in amelioration of COVID-19 severity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04397718.

Are sex hormones promising candidates to explain sex disparities in the COVID-19 pandemic?

Emerging evidence suggests that the novel Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is deadlier for men than women both in China and in Europe. Male sex is a risk factor for COVID-19 mortality. The meccanisms underlying the reduced morbidity and lethality in women are currently unclear, even though hypotheses have been posed (Brandi and Giustina in Trends Endocrinol Metab. 31:918-27, 2020). This article aims to describe the role of sex hormones in sex- and gender-related fatality of COVID-19. We discuss the possibility that potential sex-specific mechanisms modulating the course of the disease include both the androgen- and the estrogen-response cascade. Sex hormones regulate the respiratory function, the innate and adaptive immune responses, the immunoaging, the cardiovascular system, and the entrance of the virus in the cells. Recommendations for the future government policies and for the management of COVID-19 patients should include a dimorphic approach for males and females. As the estrogen receptor signaling appears critical for protection in women, more studies are needed to translate the basic knowledge into clinical actions. Understanding the etiological bases of sexual dimorphism in COVID-19 could help develop more effective strategies in individual patients in both sexes, including designing a good vaccine.

Ofeleein i mi Vlaptin-Volume II: Immunity Following Infection or mRNA Vaccination, Drug Therapies and Non-Pharmacological Management at Post-Two Years SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

The persistence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has triggered research into limiting transmission, morbidity and mortality, thus warranting a comprehensive approach to guide balanced healthcare policies with respect to people's physical and mental health. The mainstay priority during COVID-19 is to achieve widespread immunity, which could be established through natural contact or vaccination. Deep knowledge of the immune response combined with recent specific data indicates the potential inferiority of induced immunity against infection. Moreover, the prevention of transmission has been founded on general non-pharmacological measures of protection, albeit debate exists considering their efficacy and, among other issues, their socio-psychological burden. The second line of defense is engaged after infection and is supported by a plethora of studied agents, such as antibiotics, steroids and non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs, antiviral medications and other biological agents that have been proposed, though variability in terms of benefits and adverse events has not allowed distinct solutions, albeit certain treatments might have a role in prevention and/or treatment of the disease. This narrative review summarizes the existing literature on the advantages and weaknesses of current COVID-19 management measures, thus underlining the necessity of acting based on the classical principle of "ofeleein i mi vlaptin", that is, to help or not to harm.

"MATH+" Multi-Modal Hospital Treatment Protocol for COVID-19 Infection: Clinical and Scientific Rationale

In December 2019, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a severe respiratory illness caused by the new coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan, China. The greatest impact that COVID-19 had was on intensive care units (ICUs), given that approximately 20% of hospitalized cases developed acute respiratory failure (ARF) requiring ICU admission. Based on the assumption that COVID-19 represented a viral pneumonia and no anti-coronaviral therapy existed, nearly all national and international health care societies recommended "supportive care only" avoiding other therapies outside of randomized controlled trials, with a specific prohibition against the use of corticosteroids in treatment. However, early studies of COVID-19-associated ARF reported inexplicably high mortality rates, with frequent prolonged durations of mechanical ventilation (MV), even from centers expert in such supportive care strategies. These reports led the authors to form a clinical expert panel called the Front-Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (www.flccc.net). The panel collaboratively reviewed the emerging clinical, radiographic, and pathological reports of COVID-19 while initiating multiple discussions among a wide clinical network of front-line clinical ICU experts from initial outbreak areas in China, Italy, and New York. Based on the shared early impressions of "what was working and what wasn't working", the increasing medical journal publications and the rapidly accumulating personal clinical experiences with COVID-19 patients, a treatment protocol was created for the hospitalized patients based on the core therapies of methylprednisolone, ascorbic acid, thiamine, heparin and non-antiviral co-interventions (MATH+). This manuscript reviews the scientific and clinical rationale behind MATH+ based on published in-vitro, pre-clinical, and clinical data in support of each medicine, with a special emphasis of studies supporting their use in the treatment of patients with viral syndromes and COVID-19 specifically.

Alopecia in COVID-19 Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

COVID-19 is associated with androgenetic alopecia (AGA), telogen effluvium (TE), and alopecia areata (AA). No studies have analyzed the aggregate data to date.

Objective

We conducted a systematic review to characterize the types, incidence, timing, and clinical outcomes of COVID-19–associated alopecia.

Methods

We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase for articles published between November 2019 and August 2021 using the key words “alopecia” or “hair” and COVID-19–related search terms, identifying 41 original articles describing patients with alopecia and COVID-19.

Results

The current review included 1826 patients with alopecia and COVID-19 (mean age, 54.5 years; 54.3% male). The most common types of alopecia identified were AGA (30.7%, 86.4% male), TE (19.8%, 19.3% male), and AA (7.8%, 40.0% male). AGA preceded COVID-19 symptoms. TE was usually newly triggered by COVID-19 (93.6%). AA usually occurred in patients with preexisting disease (95.1%).

Limitations

Definitions of COVID-19 onset varied. Studies differed in methodology and were susceptible to reporting and sampling bias. Studies with large sample sizes may exert a disproportionate influence on data.

Conclusion

AGA may be a risk factor for severe COVID-19, whereas TE presents as a sequela of COVID-19. AA generally occurs as a relapse in patients with preexisting alopecia.

Synthesis and evaluation of enantiomers of hydroxychloroquine against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro

Since the end of 2019, the outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has evolved into a global pandemic. There is an urgent need for effective and low-toxic antiviral drugs to remedy Remdesivir's limitation. Hydroxychloroquine, a broad spectrum anti-viral drug, showed inhibitory activity against SARS-CoV-2 in some studies. Thus, we adopted a drug repurposing strategy, and further investigated hydroxychloroquine. We obtained different configurations of hydroxychloroquine side chains by using chiral resolution technique, and successfully furnished R-/S-hydroxychloroquine sulfate through chemical synthesis. The R configuration of hydroxychloroquine was found to exhibit higher antiviral activity (EC50 = 3.05 μM) and lower toxicity in vivo. Therefore, R-HCQ is a promising lead compound against SARS-CoV-2. Our research provides new strategy for the subsequent research on small molecule inhibitors against SARS-CoV-2.

A Phase 2 Trial of the Effect of Antiandrogen Therapy on COVID-19 Outcome: No Evidence of Benefit, Supported by Epidemiology and In Vitro Data

Background

Men are more severely affected by COVID-19. Testosterone may influence SARS-CoV-2 infection and the immune response.

Objective

To clinically, epidemiologically, and experimentally evaluate the effect of antiandrogens on SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Designs, settings, and participants

A randomized phase 2 clinical trial (COVIDENZA) enrolled 42 hospitalized COVID-19 patients before safety evaluation. We also conducted a population-based retrospective study of 7894 SARS-CoV-2–positive prostate cancer patients and an experimental study using an air-liquid interface three-dimensional culture model of primary lung cells.

Intervention

In COVIDENZA, patients were randomized 2:1 to 5 d of enzalutamide or standard of care.

Outcome measurements

The primary outcomes in COVIDENZA were the time to mechanical ventilation or discharge from hospital. The population-based study investigated risk of hospitalization, intensive care, and death from COVID-19 after androgen inhibition.

Results and limitations

Enzalutamide-treated patients required longer hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] for discharge from hospital 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20–0.93) and the trial was terminated early. In the epidemiological study, no preventive effects were observed. The frail population of patients treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in combination with abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide had a higher risk of dying from COVID-19 (HR 2.51, 95% CI 1.52–4.16). In vitro data showed no effect of enzalutamide on virus replication. The epidemiological study has limitations that include residual confounders.

Conclusions

The results do not support a therapeutic effect of enzalutamide or preventive effects of bicalutamide or ADT in COVID-19. Thus, these antiandrogens should not be used for hospitalized COVID-19 patients or as prevention for COVID-19. Further research on these therapeutics in this setting are not warranted.

Patient summary

We studied whether inhibition of testosterone could diminish COVID-19 symptoms. We found no evidence of an effect in a clinical study or in epidemiological or experimental investigations. We conclude that androgen inhibition should not be used for prevention or treatment of COVID-19.

EXOGENOUS Sex Hormones and Sex Hormone Receptor Modulators in COVID-19: Rationale and Clinical Pharmacology Considerations

Male patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) fare much worse than female patients in COVID-19 severity and mortality according to data from several studies. Because of this sex disparity, researchers hypothesize that the use of exogenous sex hormone therapy and sex hormone receptor modulators might provide therapeutic potential for patients with COVID-19. Repurposing approved drugs or drug candidates at late-stage clinical development could expedite COVID-19 therapy development because their clinical formulation, routes of administration, dosing regimen, clinical pharmacology, and potential adverse events have already been established or characterized in humans. A number of exogenous sex hormones and sex hormone receptor modulators are currently or will be under clinical investigation for COVID-19 therapy. In this review, we discuss the rationale for exogenous sex hormones and sex hormone receptor modulators in COVID-19 treatment, summarize ongoing and planned clinical trials, and discuss some of the clinical pharmacology considerations on clinical study design. To inform clinical study design and facilitate the clinical development of exogenous sex hormones and sex hormone receptor modulators for COVID-19 therapy, clinical investigators should pay attention to clinical pharmacology factors, such as dosing regimen, special populations (i.e., geriatrics, pregnancy, lactation, and renal/hepatic impairment), and drug interactions.

Final Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Two-Arm, Parallel Clinical Trial of Proxalutamide for Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Multiregional, Joint Analysis of the Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV Trial

Background The role of androgens on COVID-19 is well established. Proxalutamide is a second-generation, non-steroidal antiandrogen (NSAA) with the highest antiandrogen potency among NSAAs and concurrent regulation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression and inflammatory response. Proxalutamide has been demonstrated to be effective to prevent hospitalizations in early COVID-19 in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Conversely, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, preliminary results from two different arms of an RCT (The Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV Trial) also demonstrated a reduction in all-cause mortality. This study aims to report the final, joint results of the two arms (North arm and South arm) of the Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV trial of the two arms (North and South arms) combined, and to evaluate whether COVID-19 response to proxalutamide was consistent across different regions (Northern Brazil and Southern Brazil). Materials and methods Upon randomization, hospitalized COVID-19 patients received either proxalutamide 300mg/day or placebo for 14 days, in addition to usual care, in a proxalutamide:placebo ratio of 1:1 in the North arm and 4:1 in the South arm (ratio was modified due to preliminary report of high drug efficacy). Datasets of the South and North arms were combined, and statistical analysis was performed for the overall study population. Proxalutamide was compared to placebo group for 14-day and 28-day recovery (discharge alive from the hospital) and mortality rates, and overall and post-randomization hospitalization stay. Results of proxalutamide and placebo groups were also compared between the North and South arms. Analysis was also performed stratified by sex and baseline WHO COVID Ordinary Score. Results A total of 778 subjects were included (645 from the North, 317 from the proxalutamide group and 328 from the placebo group; 133 from the South arm, 106 from the proxalutamide group and 27 from the placebo group). Recovery rate was 121% higher in proxalutamide than placebo group at day 14 [81.1% vs 36.6%; Recovery ratio (RecR) 2.21; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.92-2.56; p<0.0001], and 81% higher at day 28 (98.1% vs 47.6%; RecR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.61-2.03; p<0.0001). All-cause mortality rate was 80% lower in proxalutamide than placebo group at Day 14 [8.0% vs 39.2%; Risk ratio (RR), 0.20; 95% CI, 0.14-0.29; p<0.0001], and 78% lower at Day 28 (10.6% vs 48.2%; RR, 0.22; 95% CI 0.16-0.30). Post-randomization time-to-discharge was shorter in proxalutamide [median, 5 days; interquartile range (IQR), 3-8] than placebo group (median, 9 days; IQR, 6-14) (p<0.0001). Results were statistically similar between North and South arms for all measured outcomes. Males and females presented similar results in all outcomes. Patients that did not require oxygen use (scores 3 and 4) did not present statistically significant improvement in recovery and mortality rates, whereas scores 5 and 6 presented significant improvements in all outcomes (p<0.0001 for all). Conclusion Proxalutamide increased recovery rate, reduced mortality rate and shortened hospital stay in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Results were similar between the two different arms, providing further consistency for the efficacy of proxalutamide when used in late-stage COVID-19.

Clinical drug therapies and biologicals currently used or in clinical trial to treat COVID-19

The potential emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants capable of escaping vaccine-generated immune responses poses a looming threat to vaccination efforts and will likely prolong the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the prevalence of beta coronaviruses circulating in animals and the precedent they have set in jumping into human populations indicates that they pose a continuous threat for future pandemics. Currently, only one therapeutic is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in treating COVID-19, remdesivir, although other therapies are authorized for emergency use due to this pandemic being a public health emergency. In this review, twenty-four different treatments are discussed regarding their use against COVID-19 and any potential future coronavirus-associated illnesses. Their traditional use, mechanism of action against COVID-19, and efficacy in clinical trials are assessed. Six treatments evaluated are shown to significantly decrease mortality in clinical trials, and ten treatments have shown some form of clinical efficacy.

Races of small molecule clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19: An up-to-date comprehensive review

The coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19) pandemic has become a global threat since its first outbreak at the end of 2019. Several review articles have been published recently, focusing on the aspects of target biology, drug repurposing, and mechanisms of action (MOAs) for potential treatment. This review gathers all small molecules currently in active clinical trials, categorizes them into six sub‐classes, and summarizes their clinical progress. The aim is to provide the researchers from both pharmaceutical industries and academic institutes with the handful information and dataset to accelerate their research programs in searching effective small molecule therapy for treatment of COVID‐19.

Efficacy and safety of current medications for treating severe and non-severe COVID-19 patients: an updated network meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Many recent studies have investigated the role of drug interventions for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. However, an important question has been raised about how to select the effective and secure medications for COVID-19 patients. The aim of this analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of the various medications available for severe and non-severe COVID-19 patients based on randomized placebo-controlled trials (RPCTs).

METHODS

We did an updated network meta-analysis. We searched the databases from inception until July 31, 2021, with no language restrictions. We included RPCTs comparing 49 medications and placebo in the treatment of severe and non-severe patients (aged 18 years or older) with COVID-19 infection. We extracted data on the trial and patient characteristics, and the following primary outcomes: all-cause mortality, the ratios of virological cure, and treatment-emergent adverse events. Odds ratio (OR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as effect estimates.

RESULTS

From 3,869 publications, we included 61 articles related to 73 RPCTs (57 in non-severe COVID-19 patients and 16 in severe COVID-19 patients), comprising 20,680 patients. The mean sample size was 160 (interquartile range 96-393) in this study. The median duration of follow-up drugs intervention was 28 days (interquartile range 21-30). For increase in virological cure, we only found that proxalutamide (OR 9.16, 95% CI 3.15-18.30), ivermectin (OR 6.33, 95% CI 1.22-32.86), and low dosage bamlanivimab (OR 5.29, 95% CI 1.12-24.99) seemed to be associated with non-severe COVID-19 patients when compared with placebo, in which proxalutamide seemed to be better than low dosage bamlanivimab (OR 5.69, 95% CI 2.43-17.65). For decrease in all-cause mortality, we found that proxalutamide (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.09-0.19), imatinib (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.96), and baricitinib (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42-0.82) seemed to be associated with non-severe COVID-19 patients; however, we only found that immunoglobulin gamma (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.08-0.89) was related to severe COVID-19 patients when compared with placebo. For change in treatment-emergent adverse events, we only found that sotrovimab (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.13-0.34) was associated with non-severe COVID-19 patients; however, we did not find any medications that presented a statistical difference when compared with placebo among severe COVID-19 patients.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that marked variations exist in the efficacy and safety of medications between severe and non-severe patients with COVID-19. It seems that monoclonal antibodies (e.g., low dosage bamlanivimab, baricitinib, imatinib, and sotrovimab) are a better choice for treating severe or non-severe COVID-19 patients. Clinical decisions to use preferentially medications should carefully consider the risk-benefit profile based on efficacy and safety of all active interventions in patients with COVID-19 at different levels of infection.